2009/10/22 Martin Langhoff <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Daniel Drake <[email protected]> wrote: >> We already discussed this a lot in another thread. It should not be >> automatic. The thread is titled "[Sugar-devel] [Design] Ad-hoc >> networks - New Icons" > > Yep -- I did read that thread, way back. > >> In ad-hoc, there is just one beacon master. Due to cheap radios and >> interference etc, the beacon master will switch around frequently > > So there is a scheme for beacon master-y to switch around? If it works > in practice -- that actually may do the right thing.
It rarely does. Ad-hoc is based on the concept "shout unless you hear someone else shouting." In reality it just ends up with a lot of shouting. >> 2. This kind of situation will happen frequently: >> >> A <-----> B <-----> C >> >> B can see both users A and C on his network view. A can only see B, >> and C can only see B. >> B shares an activity. Both A and C join. However, anything done by A >> cannot be seen by C and vice-versa, because they are too far apart. > > Ok, but if they are close enough it will work. The question is: if we > tell all our nodes to use the same ESSID (or a set of 3 ESSIDs, one > per freq), will independently created networks join and split > reasonably well? No - ad-hoc is so simple that there is nothing in the design to make this happen. It could happen by coincidence though, if circumstances were to arise such that B were to become beacon master. This would only happen if the existing beacon master dropped out for a while *and* if B has a faster clock than the other remaining node. But then, a few minutes later, consider B becoming the beacon master, C hosting a shared activity with a new node D, which cannot see B. Same problem, and no "coincidental" solution other than everyone moving into good radio range of each another. > If we wanted the unreliable mesh instead of the unreliable ad-hoc... > > On F11-XO-1.5 we are lacking > - 802.11s driver/firmware (which could be sub'd by open80211s) > - NM support (does it play ball w open80211s?) > - Sugar support. > > For F-11 on XO-1 > - NM support > - Sugar support > > Would that be correct? Yes. The XO-1 stuff is pretty much done - Sugar patches are available, and the NM support is in NM-0.8 and scheduled to be included in NM-0.7 after the next release. Daniel _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
